For 20 years, Steamboat resident Rob Douglas was a Washington, D.C. private detective specializing in homicide, political corruption and terrorism. Since 1998, Douglas has been a commentator on local, state and national politics in Washington, D.C., Maryland and Colorado. To reach Rob Douglas, email rdouglas@SteamboatToday.com.

Given the media assault on Palin by political journalists reporting and opining on the pregnancy of Bristol Palin - the governor's 17-year-old daughter - Palin will need to fight like a pit bull to thwart a media elite that is hostile to those not in sync with their political views.

The unwarranted treatment of the governor and her family this past week is a classic example of how journalists allow their subjective personal views to influence so-called objective news coverage. This blatant and transparent interjection of bias into news coverage is precisely why most Americans no longer trust journalists.

A quick dissection of the current controversy demonstrates how far too many journalists are more than willing to use underhanded tactics when it suits their political agenda.

Within hours of the announcement that Sen. John McCain had selected Palin as his running mate, the Daily Kos web site (described on Google as a "Daily weblog with political analysis on U.S. current events from a liberal perspective") began publishing false reports that Bristol Palin was actually the mother of Gov. Palin's fifth child, a son with Down syndrome.

Using the Daily Kos' false reports as their justification, the national media badgered the McCain campaign into responding to the malicious smear. While denying the lies, the McCain campaign revealed that Bristol is five months pregnant and will marry the father of the unborn child.

Having used the vicious Daily Kos accusations as a pretense to inquire and report about the current pregnancy of Bristol, the media then proceeded to use Bristol's pregnancy to attack Gov. Palin's public policy support of abstinence as the preferred form of birth control for children. Additionally, when the McCain campaign complained about the media's scrutiny of Bristol's pregnancy, a number of reporters huffed with self-righteous indignation that it was the campaign that issued the press release about the pregnancy and therefore it was fair game - a putrid example of circular reasoning to support gutter journalism.

But what truly exposes the media's breathtakingly hypocritical treatment of Gov. Palin's family is the undeniable fact that the same journalists investigating her family's reproductive choices never uttered a word about former Sen. John Edwards' affair during his run for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Edwards' affair was the dirty little secret of the Democratic primary and, having been documented by the National Enquirer, was known to all national political journalists. Yet, because the national political media didn't want to report that their golden boy, John Edwards, was cheating on his cancer-stricken wife, nary a word was reported by the establishment media about Edwards' lies and unfaithfulness. In fact, to this day, The New York Times and other so-called elite news organizations have barely acknowledged Edwards' infidelity.

In recent days, journalists are belatedly trying to cover their hypocrisy by claiming that the real issue is the McCain campaign's failure to properly vet Gov. Palin. The unspoken subtext of this charge is that had McCain known of Bristol's pregnancy, he would not have selected the governor as his running mate because - in the political view of these journalists - an out-of-wedlock pregnancy by the teen daughter of a pro-life politician who believes in teaching children about abstinence demonstrates that politician's political views are a failure.

Which brings us to the heart of the matter.

For many in the national political media, a far smaller circle than some readers may know, Edwards' affair with a campaign employee is a private matter not worthy of reporting because he is an accepted political insider and his behavior fits their political and moral views.

But, for those same media elite, a pro-life, pro-abstinence teaching female governor with five children - including a 17-year-old daughter who chose motherhood when confronted with an unplanned pregnancy - is the antithesis to their political views and must therefore be hounded like a pit bull.

But, this pit bull of a hockey mom wears lipstick and seems willing to fight the media elite.

Comments

JLM - let me ask, you are comfortable with Palin as the VP behind 72 year old McCain? Most actuarial tables show McCain with a 1 in 3 chance making it through 2012. What, Palin couldn't screw up the country any worse than Bush has over the past 8 years?

I'm impressed with her rise in Alaskan politics. However, this summer she didn't have a clue what the VP did, and said she couldn't take that job because all the VP does is sit around all day. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pak-rH0dCeA&NR=1

Sure, she's spunky and can read from the telepromter thanks to that previous stint as a sportscaster. I thought we learned from the past eight years that the "who I'd most like to have a beer with" and mediocrity are not good qualities in an executive? I'm not sure how someone casts a vote for McCain with Palin as a number 2.

If Rob Douglas knows for a fact that reporters knew about Edwards' affair then that would be a major national story. There was a rumor of Edwards' affair, but Edwards vehemently denied it and there is no indication that anyone had any evidence to confirm the National Enquirer story. What stopped Rob Douglas from reading the National Enquirer 18 months ago and reporting on the affair? He could have scooped the national media and been a media hero of at least the right wing. Could it be that the National Enquirer loses lawsuits for printing false stories causes serious journalists, presumably including Rob Douglas, to doubt stories in the National Enquirer?

And after the story was confirmed by Edwards, the media had no qualms reporting the rumor that the woman's young child is not her husband's, but actually Edwards',

As for Sarah Palin, she could have released a birth certificate showing that she, not her daughter is the birth parent of Trig. Instead the campaign issues a press release saying that Bristol cannot be the real mom of Trig because Bristol is 5 months pregnant and Trig is 4 months old. The campaign did not HAVE to say that Bristol was pregnant, that was their choice.

And then the press release stated that Bristol and the family chose to keep the baby. Since Sarah Palin does not support a woman's right to chose whether or not to have an abortion, that raised an obvious question of their family making a decision to not have an abortion while their political views would deny other families from having that choice.

The question about vetting comes up because the obvious subtext is that at the press conference to announce Sarah Palin included some of her kids and talked about her choice to not abort her recent baby with Down's Syndrome and includes a video clip of Bristol holding baby Trig. That no one then mentioned the presumably happy news that Bristol was engaged to be married and pregnant. Thus, if it was known by the McCain campaign that Bristol was engaged and pregnant then at the initial press meeting why was that not mentioned along with all of the other family information?

If you want to make a left wing media conspiracy out of that then go ahead. There are a whole lot of people in Oak Creek claiming SB elitist media loves writing hick town OC stories. If it were a contest between whether the OC police dept is worse at community based policing or the SB Pilot is worse at community based reporting of events in Oak Creek, I think the people of Oak Creek would say the winner of being the worst is a tie - they are both terrible.

Thus, if Rob Douglas sees left wing media conspiracies then why shouldn't we also believe in local newspaper media conspiracies? We all know that SB elitists like reading how much better they are than the trashy people in the Ditch, so reporter slant your OC stories to be sure to make it is yet another hick town OC story in the SB Pilot?

Well stated telefly and Scott. Rob, you are as bad as the journalists you purport to disdain. The "sexism" charges you lay against the media were the same charges the "liberal elite media" attacked Mrs. Clinton with only months previous. You also fail to acknowledge the "liberal" media's never-ending love affair with Mr. Obama's religious background. Your own newspaper has once again published a column by Ann Coulter who has yet to master basic writing principals and still insists on referring to the Democratic candidate by a first initial, full middle and last name format. Why doesn't she refer to John McCain as J. Sidney McCain?

If the media is "pouncing" on Mrs. Palin's family it is because her own family is a perfect example of the failures of her political positions. If her answer to sex education is pro-abstinence, it appears the policy fell short in an environment where it should have been most successful. If you want to continue partisan debating, perhaps another appropriate question would be Ms. Palin's view on stem cell research and how it relates to possible advances in the prevention and treatment of Down syndrome.

What I don't understand is why the Republican (and apparently you) think it's a good idea to have a "soccer mom", who by her own admission, "never dreamed of being Vice President" and, only months previous, stated she didn't even know what the Vice President does. We have just spent seven years under Bush; a person who was elected because people felt comfortable sharing a beer with him. What is the problem with electing someone who actually aspires to the position of Commander in Chief, takes pride in his/her education, and stayed awake long enough in elementary school to know how the Executive and Legislative branches of our government work?

The fundamental realities of this election are: If you are satisfied with the direction this country has been going for the past 7 years, you should elect John McCain. He has voted in favor of these policies 90% of the time. If you are UNSATISFIED, your only reasonable option in the upcoming election is to vote for Obama.

When Palin is attacked, the Republicans break out the sexism card.
This was not an issue with Hillary.
Why?
Because she raised a very responsible, forward-thinking and bright daughter, and was qualified for the position.

When Obama is attacked, you don't see the racism card.
Why?
Because he's not painting himself as a victim of the "liberal" media.

Here's the truth:

McCain picked a governer of a mostly-barren state whose experience is quite limited and even questionable (trooper gate, listing a plane on Ebay that never sold, but rather, was sold at a $500k loss through a broker).

She is a creationist and believes that creationism should be taught in the public schools, despite there being no evidence whatsoever to creationism's validity.

She is against any form of birth control. This means she may have another downsy child while in the White House and while "tending" to national and world affairs.

She was a mayor of a town half the size of the 'boat. No offense, but I'm not sure I'd put Ken Brenner a hearbeat away from the presidency (great guy, but just not the best pick.)

She's encouraging her 17-year old daughter to get married in the year 2008.
Good idea 100 years ago ... but not such a good one today when divorces easily outnumber marriages and broken homes are the norm.

She calls snowmobiles, snowmachines ... where is she from? Craig?

J/K 'ites.

But it's time to tell the truth ... the McCain camp has whined (a word she used to describe Hillary) about the investigation into her past and said it's "enough."

Sorry, John McRambo, it's just getting started.

Beauty queen?
She must hide her hotness well by wearing glasses to look more qualified and a little more intelligent.

As for watching McCain's speech last night...he was upstaged...BADLY...by Palin. It was awkward sounding, boring at times, and as Obama was charged- gave no specifics. At the beginning, does anyone know who's house that was up on the screen with the big lawn? Was this one of the 7 or 8 homes McCain owns? Would they really put that up there?? Seriously- does anyone know what that home was about?

His speech was very "past-centric" throughout. It wasn't an awful speech, but he's never been great with a mic in his hand. I find it curious that he barely mentioned going after Bin Laden but kept tauting that he'd "fight" for us, and that he voted for the surge in Iraq when it wasn't popular. That's great, but we still haven't found Bin Laden.

Overall, he didn't do a bad job, but he wasn't any better than anyone else who spoke these last two weeks. It was actually pretty funny that a part here or there in his speech just became nullified as soon as it was uttered...considering Obama's first interview part was shown on O'Reilly, addressing a couple of the things that he hadn't in detail before! LOL! I can wait til next week for the rest of it.

And Douglas also got it wrong in mentioning Edwards. Edwards is no longer in the political arena. His affair is now relegated to US and People Magazines fodder.

And why didn't the Straight Talk Express talk to certain music artists about using their music for theme songs? I just read that Ann & Nancy Wilson aren't too happy about "Barracuda" being played as Palin's theme song. This comes on top of the RNC being admonished by John Mellencamp, Jackson Browne, and Boston for using their music without permission. They should probably stick to Toby "We'll Put a Boot in Your A$$" Keith...except that he's said he's a Democrat! LOL! (Honestly, I never knew that about Toby Keith until recently.)

The media frenzy over the Palin surprise was exactly what McCain planned on. Its how he moved the media spolight the day after Obama's speech.

McCain put Bristol in the spotlight.

Agree with all the above posts. Very much agree with Matt's point that Bristol enjoyed a decision Palin would not allow to others. That belongs in the news, particularly in OUR right to further vet any possible VP - Palin.

Interesting breaking news that the "bridge to nowhere" funding was once coveted by Palin? She only rejected the bridge when the nation got wind of the pork smell. And Alaska has yet to give the bridge money back?

"The Daily Show and Colbert Report both had excellent clips of Rove, Dick Morris, O'Reilly and so on today praising Palin for exactly what they had been criticizing someone else a few months ago. They even had Palin telling an audience to quit whining about sexism and be tough and do the job better."

Thanks for the tip. Those Wed nite clips are a complete contradiction of the FOX NEWS "balance".

Nope! That was Scott Wedel's post, but I saw those, too. Also, Hannity had made reference on Friday about Obama's speech and using teleprompters. Ummm...McCain did, too. In fact, Fox's own camera showed a shot when McCain came out. It was him thanking the audience and from the angle, it showed a couple of lines from the beginning of his speech.

At least O'Reilly has quite a bit of balance in his stories. That's why I want to see the rest of his Obama interview.

"A quick dissection of the current controversy demonstrates how far too many journalists are more than willing to use underhanded tactics when it suits their political agenda."

Gee Rob, you've written a wonderful description of yourself in regards to the pompous commentaries you've provided on the events down in the OC.
Your unwavering bias has not been lost on most of us and your "agenda" is pretty darn apparent.
You have admitted to printing false information, but blame the editors of the Steamboat Enquirer for not printing any retractions - nice use of an "underhanded tactic".

Of course you are an OPINION writer and not a journalist, so I suppose this somehow separates you from the "elitist media" and makes it all okay.
It sure would be nice to never see your face again in the OC and never have to read another hyped load of your BS about what goes on here...but we all know you'll be dumping on us again just as soon as you get the opportunity.

In response to Matt's question about what was that first house with lawn that was shown - I think it was Daily Show (or Colbert) that pointed out that was supposed to be Walter Reed hospital, but was instead Walter Reed Middle School. Which is sort of scary as it implies the McCain campaign has discovered the internet and Google, but lacks the critical thinking skills to know if what they are looking at could realistically be what they are trying to find.

Sarah Palin is probably the best person McCain could pick to make the evangelical right wing of his party happy. And to do that role, she is quite qualified. But to give her pass on her views because she is a woman is ridiculous. And if she is going to present her family as her credentials for understanding problems of typical Americans, then it is fair game to point out that her right wing views are no better at raising a family than parents with any other political philosophy.

Sheesh, I guess I need to start locking my door again. Rob is right and is dead on!

This campaign has discovered some pretty damn good things about America --- a black man can actually get nominated for the highest office in the land and the Republicans have women of excellent qualification ready to lead. Who would have ever thunk it?

You can carp about all the details --- one is woefully inexperienced and the other is something else indeed; but, the simple truth is that the Great Society and feminism have now borne fruit.

Perfect fruit? Naw, but lush fruit just the same!

In the final analysis, it'll be the Barracuda in a surprisingly easy landslide cause America is getting ready to turn back to normal after all.

Yep, some good fruit. But I expect Palin's carriage will turn into a pumpkin. Biden gave a sound account of his views answering tough questions on Meet The Press today. Palin isn't the real deal until she does those interviews.

Let's see here, Rob. The media has covered every single little detail of Obama's life. We heard about some dude he knew from board of an anti-poverty group and that acquaintance of his who was in a real estate scandal. For months we saw his ex-pastor on the front page. The media is now talking to the humane society about the adoption of a kitten in 1992. Despite this very in-depth and often critical investigation of anything and everything remotely close to Obama, the right yells "liberal media!!!"

Now we have the media doing a very basic look at Sarah Palin and the hypocritical right is crying, whining and playing the gender card. SHE IS THE VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, PEOPLE. It sure appears to me that Rob and company are actually try to contend that reporting on Sarah should be off limits. Excuse me? The double-talk of the right is maddening. If the vice presidential candidate isn't a story, what is?

Let me ask you two very simple questions, Rob: What lies has the mainstream media told about Palin? What "underhanded tactics" have you seen? I want specific cases, not imaginary assertions. The only example you give is Daily Kos. Rob, this is a BLOG. You know, where "journalists" have no accountability. There are literally thousands of blogs out there, so I bet there are some pretty rude statements. This goes both ways. I can name you many examples of right wing blogs that print vicious untrue attacks on Obama.

The right has been whining about how much news coverage Obama gets. Now as soon as the light is shined on their party, they cry foul. This is politics, Rob. Never thought the right would cry and whine this bad. Dish it but can't take it, eh? And through all this, NOTHING from the Obama campaign except a very tasteful and classy "families are off limits." Meanwhile, the RNC was a sleaze-fest of outright lies.

I'd like for everyone to check out this little John Stewart bit on the hypocrisy of the neo-cons:

Forgive Rob, he probably needed to bang out his column quickly and just went with the ditto-head talking points he gets as part of the Karl Rove fan club.

Palin will eventually have to speak to her experience, her executive record as governor and mayor, and her views. Once that happens, only her social conservative base will remain. We all love a hockey mom or two in this town, but eventually you have to judge her on her merits. McCain won't even have that social conservative base to fall back on once he speaks to his maverick record. Forgive me, it does take a maverick to vote with President Bush 90% of the time.

For me this election hangs on a few key issues. One, Obama is proposing tax relief for families with under $225K in income. I think that's most of us, and I think most of us can use it. McCain is proposing huge tax cuts for the wealthiest, in fact his family will likely save $300K in taxes if he is elected.

John McCain is proposing more reverse Robin Hood tax cuts and spending that the Bush administration has proved doesn't work, unless your plan is to rob from the poor and give to the rich and plan on it trickling down.

The second major issue is the makeup of the supreme court. A McCain administration most likely means the make up of the court will veer even more to the right, and not even close to representative of the country's thoughts on women's rights, businesses, the fairness of elections, etc.

Foreign policy is the last major issue for me. President Clinton said it best, the world respects the power of our example far more than the example of our power. Can we fall even farther than we have today? Can we go it alone in a co-dependent global economy? Do we have any credibility when we criticize Russia for invading Georgia for regime change when we occupy Iraq for the same reason? An Obama/Biden administation gives us a chance to regain our standing in the world. Based on the RNCC, I'd say a McCain/Palin adminstration's strategy is Country First, fight first and drill baby drill. What kind of world view is that? It's amazing how the GOP thinks that jingoism is the same as patriotism.

I've already talked to a few friends who were sitting on the fence about who to vote for or even to vote. Outline the tax plans of the candidate and you will get them to polling station in November. This election is too critical for us to not have a say. Get a friend to vote and let's deliver Colorado to Obama/Biden.

With partisan mouthpieces like Rob unable to question the constantly improvised party line, Republicans are heading toward yet another embarrassing result. Rob, please check under the hood the next time you take such a drive. Apparently your candidate is worthy of all the scrutiny possible:

What's the difference between Sarah Palin and a Muslim Fundamentalist? Lipstick!

On censorship, the teaching of creationism in schools, reproductive rights, attributing government policy to God's will and climate change, Palin agrees with Hamas and Saudi Arabia rather than supporting tolerance and democratic precepts.

Charlie Gibson missed an excellent opportunity to provide a service to voters by allowing Gov Sarah Palin's thoughts and voice to be heard. He blew it with his disgusted, holier than thou, professorial attitude --- he was a lousy interviewer. He is symptomatic of what is wrong with the MSM --- they are tryiing to BE the news instead of REPORTING the news.

Bush Doctrine my butt. Read Charles Krauthammer's excellent column today --- after all he is the fellow who INVENTED the freakin' term.

Face it, Sarah Palin is connecting with the normal people in America and her very flaws cement her attractiveness. She is like most of us --- well, except for the state championship and the beauty queen and the Gov business, eh?

I went to a military school and obtained an Ivy League education on the GI Bill and put me down amongst the folks who can shoot a rifle and field dress a moose any day! We really don't need two Senators with law degrees running the country.

Steve: You liberals seem to instantly know everything, especially when it comes to Sarah. Hold the knee jerks she could be the next Maggie Thatcher for all you know. I like to withold judgement until more facts are in.

The facts can't come in until she actually speaks without having prearranged answers. So far, all her speeches are just rehashes of her RNC speech, giving little sound-bites from it. At least Obama had the guts to go on O'Reilly and did pretty well. Even O'Reilly thought so.

I wonder if she'll now continue to use the Pit Bull Lipstick joke now that it's been tainted?

And yes- I have put lipstick on a pig...a fetal pig in Mr. Craig's biology class in High School. My lab partner and I borrowed some (and nail polish) and "prettied" up our pig before slicing it open. Also pierced it's ear!

Maybe I'll be surprised and she'll use the two day interview to answer many of these questions.

Actually, I'm equally interested to see how Charlie Gibson practices journalism tonight. He is the only network anchor who has not agreed the media asked to few questions in the build up to invading Iraq.

How about Rob Douglas comes up with an interesting story for once? After dedicating at least 3 columns "discussing" the police situation in Oak Creek over the past 2 months, he seems to have plagiarized a story straight from the Fox News Channel. I realize that there are not many good stories coming out of Routt County these days, but please do us all a favor and try a little harder. Perhaps you could give page 2 every Friday to a guest columnist as a lot of the folks posting on this site are more consistently insightful than Rob. I could go on, but will wait to see what Rob comes up with in tomorrow's paper (I am betting it will have something to do with tonight's town meeting in Oak Creek).

Fred,
After watching Palin and Gibson on ABC, I think she did well for herself. Its her beginning of answering the questions like everyone else does. She was skillful in avoiding any policy gaffes or controversy.

Gibson asked good questions and the mystery subsides.

But I was disappointed to come away believing she had the questions in advance, and she had prepared answers. Palin never seemed to pause to consider Gibson's questions. Never paused in choosing her words. When Gibson pressed for a better answer to the same question, she almost verbatim repeated her original answer.

A follow-up question left the script to explore "Bush Doctrine" (pre-emptive war). She didn't know what that meant.

Her sexist rants are getting old, as well as the questions about her background.

Imagine this, if you will:
Barack Obama brings out his pregnant daughter and her baby daddy on the stage and introduces them to the nation.

Truth on Palin:
- Had an affair with her husband's friend in the mid-90s.
- Son (the war hero) was told to join the Army or he'd end up in jail for his Oxycontin issues.
- Is a religious extremist who can see Russia, Charlie.
- Doesn't believe in science.

Imagine a black man in politics carrying that baggage.
And that' just a sampling.

Bad, bad, bad decision to put her on the ticket.
Her interview last night was atrocious and today the outlets are spinning as much as they can.